Articles

In January, 3PB’s Tom Webb appeared for the successful appellant in the Court of Appeal in the matter of Pearson -v- Secretary of State for Defence [2024] EWCA Civ 150. In this article, Tom discusses the case and the AFCS itself: required reading for those dealing with cases concerning current and former members of the Forces.

3PB's commercial and chancery law barrister Aaron Mayers discusses the new limits set on section 994 petitions following the case of THG PLC & Ors v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd.

Matthew Wyard on the recent Court of Protection property & affairs decisions of PSG Trust Corporation Ltd v CK & Re: P (Statutory Will).

In PSG Trust Corporation Ltd v CK [2024] EWCOP 14, the Court considered how a property and affairs deputy should approach the issue of whether to inform P of the value of a civil litigation settlement.

Re: P (Statutory Will) [2024] EWCOP 12 concerned an application to amend a statutory will, for which the Court had to consider if unidentified charity beneficiaries had to be served with the application to amend in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 9 of Practice Direction 9E.

Sarah Clarke considers the case of Jones v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care EA-2022-000744-JOJ, which provides a useful reminder of the very wide discretion given to employment tribunals when determining whether or not a claim had been brought within such time as was just and equitable, and appellate courts should be slow to interfere with the exercise of this discretion.

Craig Ludlow on the case of Hargreaves v (1) Evolve Housing & Support (2) Mr Simon McGrath, in which the EAT reminds us how difficult it is to get claims struck out before Employment Tribunals.

Specifically, in this case, cogent evidence was needed to support the assertion that a fair trial was not possible because of the claimant's conduct, instead of simply relying on the ET to make this assumption.

Mark Green follows up an important change in the law since his £350,000 win in the associative indirect discrimination case of Follows.

S19A Equality Act 2010 expressly permits such claims and therefore provides important clarity for carers and others who may suffer indirect discrimination by association.

Jo Laxton analyses the case of Bauhaus Educational Services Limited v Elemide [2023] EAT 161, in which the EAT considers the guidance in Minnoch to determine if a claimant had complied with the terms of an Unless Order.

Read Mark Wilden's article about navigating copyright in the world of ever evolving technology for Counsel magazine.

Katherine Anderson gives an update on the amendments to the Equality Act 2010, in which the purpose of the regulations is to reproduce in domestic law certain interpretive effects of retained EU law which, under the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023, would otherwise cease to apply in the UK after the end of 2023.

Katherine Anderson reviews the appeal of London Borough Camden v KT [2024] UKUT 225 (AAC), in which Upper Tribunal Judge Jacobs analysed the legal position when a parent consents to the special educational provision in their child's EHCP being arranged in the family home.

Olivia McGonigle looks at the appeal to the Upper Tribunal of LC and RC v Hampshire County Council [2023] UKUT 281 (AAC) which concerned, among other things, the test that should be applied when section I of an Educational Health and Care Plan ('EHCP') is in dispute.

Katherine Anderson considers the appeal A Multi Academy Trust v RR [2024] UKUT 9 (AAC), in which the issues around the application of the test in section 20(3) of the Equality Act 2010 as modified by schedule 13, particularly in its application to special schools.